Coverages important to Thyme include the following. While not necessarily unique to a builder’s risk policy, are typically offered by insurers also with sublimits:
In electing to purchase the builder’s risk insurance in accord with the AIA A201™-2007, Thyme has agreed to include coverage in the builder’s risk policy for not only their interest, but also the interests in the project of Perkins and any other contractor, subcontractor or sub-subcontractor. Unless others object, Thyme is authorized to settle a claim with the builder’s risk insurer, but holds the proceeds as a fiduciary for other insured interests. Further, Jennifer notices that Thyme is required to continue the builder’s risk insurance in effect until final payments have been made or Thyme is the only person or organization with an interest in the project – whichever is later. The time period for which Thyme has agreed to maintain the builder’s risk in force will influence the selected policy period – particularly if the project is expected to take over one year. Jennifer’s research has revealed that obtaining a builder’s risk policy from a new insurer on a building that is partially completed is very difficult – if available at all – and thus the strong preference to continue the same builder’s risk policy until the project is finished.
Thyme is considering a larger deductible – $25,000 – to keep premium costs down. This raises a question – if the loss is caused by the negligence of Perkins or a subcontractor, can Thyme charge the deductible to that responsible party? After a conference with Thyme’s legal counsel, Jennifer learns that Thyme cannot recover such costs because Thyme has agreed to the AIA A201™-2007 conditions – which clearly state Thyme is responsible for any loss within the builder’s risk deductible. In fact, Thyme’s legal counsel points out to Jennifer that Thyme has waived its rights against Perkins and any of their subcontractors or sub-subcontractors to the extent that the builder’s risk policy (or other property insurance) provides coverage for the damage. Further, Perkins and its subcontractors and sub-subcontractors also waive any rights they may have to recover from Thyme – again, to the extent the damage caused is covered by insurance. The implications of the waiver clause are clear to Jennifer– the builder’s risk policy she purchases must allow Thyme to waive its rights against all other interests covered by this policy – including damage to the project that is not the work of a subcontractor or sub-subcontractor.4
As might be expected, Thyme’s owner, Justin, is very eager to get the project finished and is already asking Perkins when he can move into the new facility and start manufacturing. Apparently this may be a problem – Jennifer learns that a builder’s risk policy may cease providing coverage if Thyme begins to occupy the new facility. However, after some inquiry, she finds that insurers will generally grant permission to occupy. After a discussion between Jennifer and Justin about this matter, Justin agrees to give Jennifer as much notice as possible before he begins occupying the new facility – giving Jennifer time to seek permission from the insurer for occupancy and avoid losing coverage under the builder’s risk policy.
An area that is not at all clear to Jennifer is the section of the AIA A201™-2007 contract that is entitled “Loss of Use Insurance.” While Jennifer understands that Thyme has waived all of its rights of action against Perkins for loss of use of the facility due to “fire or other hazards, however caused” and also knows the purchase of this insurance is at the option of Thyme, she does not know what is meant by “loss of use insurance.”
If an insured cause of loss damages Thyme’s facility and that damage results in a delay in the project completion, Thyme could suffer two types of consequential loss:
Jennifer has a strong understanding of the general contours of Thyme’s builder’s risk insurance needs, including its obligations under its construction contract with Perkins. However, she has a great deal of work left to do – starting with choosing a building limit, including sublimits for certain coverages and coverage extensions, as well as whether and how much loss of income and soft cost coverage (including the categories of soft costs coverage) to purchase. In addition, upon review of builder’s risk proposals, it is important for Jennifer to review the policy forms being offered to make sure she has the coverage she wants or needs, including but not limited to the causes of loss, whether all interests are insured and whether Thyme’s waiver of it rights against the others is allowed in the policy. Finally, Jennifer needs to explore limitations in the builder’s risk policy as respects occupancy by Thyme – will the insurer permit occupancy – if so, when and under what conditions.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Craig F. Stanovich, CPCU, CIC, CRM, AU is co-founder and principal of Austin & Stanovich Risk Managers, LLC, a risk management and insurance advisory consulting firm specializing in all aspects of commercial insurance and risk management, providing risk management and insurance solutions, not insurance sales. Services include fee based risk management, expert witness and litigation support and technical/educational support to insurance companies, agents and brokers. He can be reached via email at email@example.com, or the website austinstanovich.com.
1 © 2007 by the American Institute of Architects
2 Falsework is defined as the temporary structure erected to support work in the process of construction. Source: dictionaryofconstruction.com
3 Coverage for an existing building undergoing renovation can usually be arranged, often with a separate limit from the value of the renovations and often on an actual cash value basis.
4 “Thus, to determine which fire damages are covered by the subrogation waiver, we must look at everything that follows the phrase ‘to the extent.’ The positioning and plain meaning of the word "covered" restricts the scope of the subrogation waiver based on the source and extent of the property insurance coverage, not the nature of the damages or of the damaged property.” Bd. Of Comm’rs of Cnty. of Jefferson v. Teton Corp.,30 N.E.3d 711 (Ind. 2015)
Legal Disclaimer. Views expressed here do not constitute legal advice. The information contained herein is for general guidance of matter only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Discussion of insurance policy language is descriptive only. Every policy has different policy language. Coverage afforded under any insurance policy issued is subject to individual policy terms and conditions. Please refer to your policy for the actual language.
(c) 2017 AmWINS Group, Inc.
Construction contract negotiations, which determine the kind and amount of insurance required for a construction project, can be time-consuming, complicated and frustrating. Project owners require contractors on a project to name the project owner as an additional insured on the contractor’s casualty insurance program. It's important that both project owners and contractors understand the coverage provided by these additional insured endorsements. This article discusses four common ISO additional insured endorsements related to commercial general liability policies purchased by contractors, including their limitations, conditions and exclusions.
A common complication during the claim process is the late reporting of claims. In some cases, a late claim can put the agent or broker's own E&O policy in jeopardy. There are many reasons for missing a reporting deadline; however, in most cases, they will not matter to the insurer or the courts. This article discusses typical claim reporting requirements, common causes of late reporting, and recommendations to mitigate the risk of late notice claim denials.
The theories of recovery, as well as the ensuing loss provisions, contained in property insurance policies are often complex and, at times, seemingly in conflict. Although a policy may not directly address these theories, their application by courts plays a significant role in the coverage determination process after the claim. It is essential that brokers understand the primary theories of recovery – Efficient Proximate Cause, the Concurrent Causation Doctrine, and the Anti-Concurrent Causation Doctrine – in order to navigate the challenging post-claim process and effectively serve their clients.
The Thomas Fire, the largest fire in California's history, subsequently led to a mudslide on January 9, 2018, which caused a massive amount of damage in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. The California Insurance Commissioner has issued a formal notice reminding carriers to pay for damage, citing the "efficient proximate cause doctrine." This article takes a closer look at the doctrine and how it has been challenged in court over the years.
Ordinance or Law insurance coverage provides limited protection for costs associated with repairing, rebuilding, or constructing a structure when physical damage to the structure by a covered cause of loss triggers an ordinance or law. Compliance with ordinances and laws after a loss can add 50% or more to the cost of a claim. This article will help you educate your insureds on exclusions and limitations and help them take a proactive approach to their insurance program.
In 2017, the issue of sexual harassment – especially in the workplace – gained greater awareness as accusations of harassment by high-profile individuals were constantly in the news. In many cases, sexual harassment lawsuits seriously impacted businesses and their respective insurers. Employment Practices Liability Insurance not only provides protection against employee lawsuits, but can also help your clients mitigate their sexual harassment risks.